Tor

Tor is an encrypted anonymising network that makes it harder to intercept internet communications, or see where communications are coming from or going to.

In order to use the WikiLeaks public submission system as detailed above you can download the Tor Browser Bundle, which is a Firefox-like browser available for Windows, Mac OS X and GNU/Linux and pre-configured to connect using the anonymising system Tor.

Tails

If you are at high risk and you have the capacity to do so, you can also access the submission system through a secure operating system called Tails. Tails is an operating system launched from a USB stick or a DVD that aim to leaves no traces when the computer is shut down after use and automatically routes your internet traffic through Tor. Tails will require you to have either a USB stick or a DVD at least 4GB big and a laptop or desktop computer.

Tips

Our submission system works hard to preserve your anonymity, but we recommend you also take some of your own precautions. Please review these basic guidelines.

1. Contact us if you have specific problems

If you have a very large submission, or a submission with a complex format, or are a high-risk source, please contact us. In our experience it is always possible to find a custom solution for even the most seemingly difficult situations.

2. What computer to use

If the computer you are uploading from could subsequently be audited in an investigation, consider using a computer that is not easily tied to you. Technical users can also use Tails to help ensure you do not leave any records of your submission on the computer.

3. Do not talk about your submission to others

If you have any issues talk to WikiLeaks. We are the global experts in source protection – it is a complex field. Even those who mean well often do not have the experience or expertise to advise properly. This includes other media organisations.

After

1. Do not talk about your submission to others

If you have any issues talk to WikiLeaks. We are the global experts in source protection – it is a complex field. Even those who mean well often do not have the experience or expertise to advise properly. This includes other media organisations.

2. Act normal

If you are a high-risk source, avoid saying anything or doing anything after submitting which might promote suspicion. In particular, you should try to stick to your normal routine and behaviour.

3. Remove traces of your submission

If you are a high-risk source and the computer you prepared your submission on, or uploaded it from, could subsequently be audited in an investigation, we recommend that you format and dispose of the computer hard drive and any other storage media you used.

In particular, hard drives retain data after formatting which may be visible to a digital forensics team and flash media (USB sticks, memory cards and SSD drives) retain data even after a secure erasure. If you used flash media to store sensitive data, it is important to destroy the media.

If you do this and are a high-risk source you should make sure there are no traces of the clean-up, since such traces themselves may draw suspicion.

4. If you face legal action

If a legal action is brought against you as a result of your submission, there are organisations that may help you. The Courage Foundation is an international organisation dedicated to the protection of journalistic sources. You can find more details at https://www.couragefound.org.

Submit documents to WikiLeaks

WikiLeaks publishes documents of political or historical importance that are censored or otherwise suppressed. We specialise in strategic global publishing and large archives.

The following is the address of our secure site where you can anonymously upload your documents to WikiLeaks editors. You can only access this submissions system through Tor. (See our Tor tab for more information.) We also advise you to read our tips for sources before submitting.

wlupld3ptjvsgwqw.onion

Copy this address into your Tor browser. Advanced users, if they wish, can also add a further layer of encryption to their submission using our public PGP key.

If you cannot use Tor, or your submission is very large, or you have specific requirements, WikiLeaks provides several alternative methods. Contact us to discuss how to proceed.

TURKISH OFFICIALS AND AGRIBUSINESS
Ref: 2004 Ankara 6772
Summary
-------
1. (SBU) In meetings with GOT officials and private
sector organizations, State's Senior Agricultural
Biotech Advisor raised U.S. concerns about the
potential of Turkey's draft biosafety law to hinder
trade and development, and provided an overview of
U.S. biotechnology policies, particularly with respect
to the EU's regulatory approach. GOT interlocutors
stressed that the draft law was being developed with
extensive stakeholder input, and that it would be
submitted to Parliament by the end of March. However,
business representatives believe that in its current
form the legislation could have disastrous
consequences not only for trade, but for Turkish
agribusiness. Business representatives suggested that
high-profile USG advocacy on this issue could be
counterproductive. USDA/FAS comments were passed to
key officials in the Ministry of Agriculture and
Parliament. Embassy recommends that Washington
agencies again review the draft law specifically for
consistency with Turkey's WTO commitments. End
Summary.
2. (U) Madelyn Spirnak, State's Senior Advisor for
Agricultural Biotechnology met with GOT officials,
parliamentarians, local farm and trade associations,
academic and industry representatives in Ankara and
Istanbul January 31 - February 3 to discuss the
current status of Turkey's biosafety regulations and
to promote science-based, pro-development policies in
this area. Accompanied by FAS and ECON, Spirnak met
with the Agriculture Undersecretary, three
parliamentarians on the Agriculture Committee, the
Head of Department of the Agricultural Research
General Directorate (TAGEM), the Vice President of the
Scientific and Technical Research Institute (TUBITAK);
senior officials of the Treasury U/S responsible for
investment policy; and officials at the Environment
Ministry and the State Planning Organization. She
also met with former International Visitor Program
participants, Fulbright alumni and other academics;
representatives of the poultry, seed, feed
associations; the farmers' union; U.S. agribusiness;
the Turkish Industrialists and Businessmen's
Association (TUSIAD); and gave an interview to Turkish
daily Referans, published on February 5.
3. (SBU) In these meetings, Spirnak raised USG
concerns about aspects of Turkey's draft biosafety
regulation which could hinder trade and development.
She provided an update on the U.S. case in the WTO
against the EU biotechnology moratorium, and explained
U.S. concerns on European traceability and labeling
regulations. Emphasizing the important role
agricultural biotechnology can play in encouraging
environmentally-friendly economic growth, Spirnak
provided an overview of global biotechnology trends,
including increases in cultivation and new studies on
the benefits of biotechnology to developing country
farmers.
TURKEY'S BIOTECH LAW NEARING COMPLETION
---------------------------------------
4. (SBU) According to GOT officials, Turkish biosafety
legislation will soon be sent to the Prime Minister's
Office, and then to the Parliament. GOT and trade
sources expect the law to be sent in its current form
to the Parliament by the end of March. The
Agriculture U/S and Vehbi Eser, a Head of Department
within TAGEM and the Chair of the Interagency Biotech
Committee, stressed that the GOT was going to great
lengths to take into account the views of all
stakeholders by posting the draft law on the Internet
and holding a series of outreach meetings around
Turkey to discuss it. Eser pointed out provisions in
the draft law which would fast-track biotech
applications for products approved by foreign
regulatory authorities, including those in the U.S.
Note: FAS has emailed copies of the latest draft of
the legislation to Washington agencies. End Note.
5. (SBU) Other agencies also shared their views. An
expert in the State Planning Office stressed that, in
drafting the law, the GOT was attempting not only to
implement the Cartagena Protocol, but also to
incorporate elements of relevant EU directives and to
protect biodiversity in Turkey. Tubitak's Vice
President hinted that his agency was reluctant to take
a high profile position on an issue as controversial
as biotech, although it was supporting some limited
research. Treasury's Deputy U/S expressed interest in
learning more about the developmental benefits of
adopting biotech and the potential fiscal cost of the
new law's extensive testing requirements. They asked
for copies of USDA/FAS comments on the draft law and
said they would be more active in interagency
discussions.
Law's Impact on Trade and Turkish Agriculture
---------------------------------------------
6. (U) Business representatives were very concerned
about several aspects of the current biosafety draft.
They maintained that, despite GOT assurances to the
contrary, the legislation will disrupt trade and all
agricultural industries. If strictly implemented,
industry sources indicated that the feed and poultry
industry will not be able to operate. The legislation
even threatens to disrupt the importation of
conventional parent seeds due to the excessive
liability provisions and expected extremely low
tolerance levels for adventitious presence (industry
reports a 0.3 percent AP level).
7. (SBU) Industry is scrambling to lobby the GOT with
their concerns and to prevent the creation of an
autonomous biotechnology agency in the Turkish
Government. In the meantime, anti-biotech groups are
complaining that the law is too lenient and will allow
GMOs to flood the country. Optimistic observers hope
that Parliament may not act on the measure immediately
or may make significant changes to the law. Industry
representatives, speaking through their food
manufacturers association, thanked Spirnak and the
Embassy for lobbying to date, but requested that the
USG refrain from continued intensive activity on the
issue lest those actions become counterproductive -
both politically and in terms of public perception.
Background on Legislation
-------------------------
8. (U) The drafting of the biosafety legislation has
been in progress for over one year, and was initiated
by Turkey's signing of the Cartagena Biosafety
Protocol. Unfortunately, Turkey's official expertise
in the sector appears to be limited to one key
individual - the Head of Dept of the Biotechnology
Group at TAGEM - who has controlled the direction and
restrictive nature of the legislation and is expected
to angle for the position of head of the new
biotechnology agency While claiming that the law is
based on the U.S. risk assessment principles as well
as EU Directives, there are several elements of the
law that are intended to satisfy a small yet vocal
group of anti-GMO NGOs. For example, liability and
penalty provisions in the law specify that importers
and handlers of GMOS are liable for any environmental
or health claims up to 30 years after the product is
introduced. Penalty provisions are likewise quite
strict and would prevent most businessmen and farmers
from signing all of the various applications and
permits required.
9. (U) Since the law creates an independent biosafety
agency, industry is rightly concerned that the
bureaucratic burden of applications, permits and
testing will be time consuming and expensive and they
worry about possibilities for corruption. The fee
structure laid out in the law is quite excessive. In
addition to the various application and testing fees,
the law allows for a 0.03 percent fee levied on all
imports of materials developed through biotechnology.
Comment/Action Recommendation
-----------------------------
10. (U) Ms. Spirnak's visit, including her outreach to
the press, business, and parliamentarians, was very
useful in helping Post broaden the vigorous debate on
the draft law and educate potential stakeholders about
how their interests could be advantaged through
biotechnology or disadvantaged through a restrictive,
non-science based regulatory process. The emotional
public discussion of this subject remains, however,
deeply distorted by misinformation and disinformation.
11. (SBU) Embassy FAS, Economic and Public Affairs
sections will continue to work with constituents to
provide updated and accurate information relevant to
biotechnology. We appreciate the Department's decision
to fund a U.S. speaker through EB and IIP on the
developmental and environmental benefits of adopting
science-based biotech policies, and look forward to
the Department's suggestions on possible candidates.
We will also approach TUBITAK's "Bilim ve Teknik"
popular monthly science magazine about the possibility
of providing information for an article on some
positive aspect of agricultural biotechnology.
Embassy recommends that Washington agencies again
review Turkey's draft biosafety law specifically for
compliance with WTO commitments as soon as possible
and provide talking points for use with GOT and
parliamentary officials.
12. (U) The Senior Agricultural Biotechnology Advisor
has cleared this cable.
Edelman

Raw content

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 ANKARA 000862
SIPDIS
DEPT FOR EB/TPP/ABT, IIP/T/ES, EUR/SE
USTR FOR LERRION/BPECK
USDOC FOR ITA/MAC/DDEFALCO
USDA FOR FAS/OA/BIG BSIMMONS, PSPENCER, JPPASSINO
SENSITIVE
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: EAGR, ETRD, TBIO, KPAO, TU
SUBJECT: SENIOR BIOTECH ADVISOR'S MEETINGS WITH
TURKISH OFFICIALS AND AGRIBUSINESS
Ref: 2004 Ankara 6772
Summary
-------
1. (SBU) In meetings with GOT officials and private
sector organizations, State's Senior Agricultural
Biotech Advisor raised U.S. concerns about the
potential of Turkey's draft biosafety law to hinder
trade and development, and provided an overview of
U.S. biotechnology policies, particularly with respect
to the EU's regulatory approach. GOT interlocutors
stressed that the draft law was being developed with
extensive stakeholder input, and that it would be
submitted to Parliament by the end of March. However,
business representatives believe that in its current
form the legislation could have disastrous
consequences not only for trade, but for Turkish
agribusiness. Business representatives suggested that
high-profile USG advocacy on this issue could be
counterproductive. USDA/FAS comments were passed to
key officials in the Ministry of Agriculture and
Parliament. Embassy recommends that Washington
agencies again review the draft law specifically for
consistency with Turkey's WTO commitments. End
Summary.
2. (U) Madelyn Spirnak, State's Senior Advisor for
Agricultural Biotechnology met with GOT officials,
parliamentarians, local farm and trade associations,
academic and industry representatives in Ankara and
Istanbul January 31 - February 3 to discuss the
current status of Turkey's biosafety regulations and
to promote science-based, pro-development policies in
this area. Accompanied by FAS and ECON, Spirnak met
with the Agriculture Undersecretary, three
parliamentarians on the Agriculture Committee, the
Head of Department of the Agricultural Research
General Directorate (TAGEM), the Vice President of the
Scientific and Technical Research Institute (TUBITAK);
senior officials of the Treasury U/S responsible for
investment policy; and officials at the Environment
Ministry and the State Planning Organization. She
also met with former International Visitor Program
participants, Fulbright alumni and other academics;
representatives of the poultry, seed, feed
associations; the farmers' union; U.S. agribusiness;
the Turkish Industrialists and Businessmen's
Association (TUSIAD); and gave an interview to Turkish
daily Referans, published on February 5.
3. (SBU) In these meetings, Spirnak raised USG
concerns about aspects of Turkey's draft biosafety
regulation which could hinder trade and development.
She provided an update on the U.S. case in the WTO
against the EU biotechnology moratorium, and explained
U.S. concerns on European traceability and labeling
regulations. Emphasizing the important role
agricultural biotechnology can play in encouraging
environmentally-friendly economic growth, Spirnak
provided an overview of global biotechnology trends,
including increases in cultivation and new studies on
the benefits of biotechnology to developing country
farmers.
TURKEY'S BIOTECH LAW NEARING COMPLETION
---------------------------------------
4. (SBU) According to GOT officials, Turkish biosafety
legislation will soon be sent to the Prime Minister's
Office, and then to the Parliament. GOT and trade
sources expect the law to be sent in its current form
to the Parliament by the end of March. The
Agriculture U/S and Vehbi Eser, a Head of Department
within TAGEM and the Chair of the Interagency Biotech
Committee, stressed that the GOT was going to great
lengths to take into account the views of all
stakeholders by posting the draft law on the Internet
and holding a series of outreach meetings around
Turkey to discuss it. Eser pointed out provisions in
the draft law which would fast-track biotech
applications for products approved by foreign
regulatory authorities, including those in the U.S.
Note: FAS has emailed copies of the latest draft of
the legislation to Washington agencies. End Note.
5. (SBU) Other agencies also shared their views. An
expert in the State Planning Office stressed that, in
drafting the law, the GOT was attempting not only to
implement the Cartagena Protocol, but also to
incorporate elements of relevant EU directives and to
protect biodiversity in Turkey. Tubitak's Vice
President hinted that his agency was reluctant to take
a high profile position on an issue as controversial
as biotech, although it was supporting some limited
research. Treasury's Deputy U/S expressed interest in
learning more about the developmental benefits of
adopting biotech and the potential fiscal cost of the
new law's extensive testing requirements. They asked
for copies of USDA/FAS comments on the draft law and
said they would be more active in interagency
discussions.
Law's Impact on Trade and Turkish Agriculture
---------------------------------------------
6. (U) Business representatives were very concerned
about several aspects of the current biosafety draft.
They maintained that, despite GOT assurances to the
contrary, the legislation will disrupt trade and all
agricultural industries. If strictly implemented,
industry sources indicated that the feed and poultry
industry will not be able to operate. The legislation
even threatens to disrupt the importation of
conventional parent seeds due to the excessive
liability provisions and expected extremely low
tolerance levels for adventitious presence (industry
reports a 0.3 percent AP level).
7. (SBU) Industry is scrambling to lobby the GOT with
their concerns and to prevent the creation of an
autonomous biotechnology agency in the Turkish
Government. In the meantime, anti-biotech groups are
complaining that the law is too lenient and will allow
GMOs to flood the country. Optimistic observers hope
that Parliament may not act on the measure immediately
or may make significant changes to the law. Industry
representatives, speaking through their food
manufacturers association, thanked Spirnak and the
Embassy for lobbying to date, but requested that the
USG refrain from continued intensive activity on the
issue lest those actions become counterproductive -
both politically and in terms of public perception.
Background on Legislation
-------------------------
8. (U) The drafting of the biosafety legislation has
been in progress for over one year, and was initiated
by Turkey's signing of the Cartagena Biosafety
Protocol. Unfortunately, Turkey's official expertise
in the sector appears to be limited to one key
individual - the Head of Dept of the Biotechnology
Group at TAGEM - who has controlled the direction and
restrictive nature of the legislation and is expected
to angle for the position of head of the new
biotechnology agency While claiming that the law is
based on the U.S. risk assessment principles as well
as EU Directives, there are several elements of the
law that are intended to satisfy a small yet vocal
group of anti-GMO NGOs. For example, liability and
penalty provisions in the law specify that importers
and handlers of GMOS are liable for any environmental
or health claims up to 30 years after the product is
introduced. Penalty provisions are likewise quite
strict and would prevent most businessmen and farmers
from signing all of the various applications and
permits required.
9. (U) Since the law creates an independent biosafety
agency, industry is rightly concerned that the
bureaucratic burden of applications, permits and
testing will be time consuming and expensive and they
worry about possibilities for corruption. The fee
structure laid out in the law is quite excessive. In
addition to the various application and testing fees,
the law allows for a 0.03 percent fee levied on all
imports of materials developed through biotechnology.
Comment/Action Recommendation
-----------------------------
10. (U) Ms. Spirnak's visit, including her outreach to
the press, business, and parliamentarians, was very
useful in helping Post broaden the vigorous debate on
the draft law and educate potential stakeholders about
how their interests could be advantaged through
biotechnology or disadvantaged through a restrictive,
non-science based regulatory process. The emotional
public discussion of this subject remains, however,
deeply distorted by misinformation and disinformation.
11. (SBU) Embassy FAS, Economic and Public Affairs
sections will continue to work with constituents to
provide updated and accurate information relevant to
biotechnology. We appreciate the Department's decision
to fund a U.S. speaker through EB and IIP on the
developmental and environmental benefits of adopting
science-based biotech policies, and look forward to
the Department's suggestions on possible candidates.
We will also approach TUBITAK's "Bilim ve Teknik"
popular monthly science magazine about the possibility
of providing information for an article on some
positive aspect of agricultural biotechnology.
Embassy recommends that Washington agencies again
review Turkey's draft biosafety law specifically for
compliance with WTO commitments as soon as possible
and provide talking points for use with GOT and
parliamentary officials.
12. (U) The Senior Agricultural Biotechnology Advisor
has cleared this cable.
Edelman

Metadata

This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
151137Z Feb 05

Print

You can use this tool to generate a print-friendly PDF of the document 05ANKARA862_a.

Include summaryInclude headersInclude raw metadata

Share

The formal reference of this document is 05ANKARA862_a, please use it for anything written about this document. This will permit you and others to search for it.